ZANKS FOR THE MEMORIES

INTERESTING QUIZ

2010-03-24T04:50:00.000-07:00

An e-mail I've received a few times and thought it was pretty damn accurate!

If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat..
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.

If a conservative is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a liberal is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.

If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.

If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended".

THE OBAMA APOLOGY TOUR CHRONOLOGY

2009-05-11T11:07:00.000-07:00

The following is a list, in reverse chronological order, of the Obama administration's overseas apologies and clarifications to date:

April 18: "We have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. But I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership. There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations."-- President Obama, at the Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, Trinidad
April 16: "Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors. We have been too easily distracted by other priorities and have failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas. My administration is committed to renewing and sustaining a broader partnership between the United States and the hemisphere on behalf of our common prosperity and our common security."-- President Obama, in an op-ed that appeared in U.S. and Latin American newspapers prior to the Summit of the Americas
April 6: "I know there have been difficulties these last few years. I know that the trust that binds us has been strained, and I know that strain is shared in many places where the Muslim faith is practiced. Let me say this as clearly as I can: the United States is not at war with Islam."-- President Obama, in Ankara, Turkey
April 3: "In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive. But in Europe, there is an anti-Americanism that is at once casual but can also be insidious. Instead of recognizing the good that America so often does in the world, there have been times where Europeans choose to blame America for much of what's bad. On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common. They are not wise. ... They threaten to widen the divide across the Atlantic and leave us both more isolated."-- President Obama, in Strasbourg, France
April 2: "It is true, as my Italian friend has said, that the (economic) crisis began in the U.S. I take responsibility, even if I wasn't even president at the time."-- President Obama, at the G20 in London, as reported by Germany's Der Spiegel
April 2: "I would like to think that with my election and the early decisions that we've made, that you're starting to see some restoration of America's standing in the world."-- President Obama, at G20 summit in London
April 1: "If you look at the sources of this crisis, the United States certainly has some accounting to do with respect to a regulatory system that was inadequate."-- President Obama, at a press conference ahead of the G20 in London
March 25: "I feel very strongly we have a co-responsibility (for drug-fueled violence in Mexico). ... Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade. Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police officers, soldiers and civilians."-- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, en route to Mexico City
Jan. 26: "All too often the United States starts by dictating ... and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs. ... My job to the Muslim world is to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes make mistakes. We have not been perfect."-- President Obama, in an interview with Al Arabiya
The Obama administration has also expressed plenty of regret stateside as it rolls back some of Bush's counter-terrorism policies. The president, for instance, acknowledged potential "mistakes" as he addressed CIA employees April 20 and discussed his ban of enhanced interrogation techniques."Don't be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we've made some mistakes. That's how we learn," Obama said.The Associated Press contributed to this report.

HELL, LET'S JUST SURRENDER NOW AND GET IT OVER WITH, AFTER ALL, WE ARE TO BLAME FOR ALL THE WORLDS' PROBLEMS, JUST ASK DER LEADER.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/10/world-stage-obama/

Corporate Oil Booms In Low-Tax Switzerland

2009-03-12T10:00:00.001-07:00

HOPE AND CHANGE RE-DUX

The tidy towns and mountain vistas of Switzerland are an unlikely setting for an oil boom.
Yet a wave of energy companies has in the last few months announced plans to move to Switzerland -- mainly for its appeal as a low-tax corporate domicile that looks relatively likely to stay out of reach of Barack Obama's tax-seeking administration.

Guido Jud, head of Zug's tax office, said about 1,200 companies had set up shop there in 2008 -- in line with the long-term average, though it is difficult to assess how many of those are foreign companies until they file tax returns.

As more hope-n-change comes our way, you can expect a lot more companies will move away from the USA as well. The only employer left when Urkel's done will be the Federal Goverment.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSL312427120090312?feedType=RSS&feedName=rbssEnergyNews&rpc=22

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP

2009-03-12T09:41:00.000-07:00

For those of you that thought the Bush Administration had a problem with left hand not knowing what the right is doing i respectfully submit:

Senators slam plan for wounded vets to use private insurance
By Adam LevineCNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki confirmed Tuesday that the Obama administration is considering a controversial plan to make veterans pay for treatment of service-related injuries with private insurance.

Let’s see. The same administration that wants to give tens of billions of dollars to GM, Citigroup, AIG, and a host of other banks and manufacturers wants men and women injured in service to their country to pay for the medical care that arises from these injuries? In what universe does Shinseki and the Obama administration live, anyway?

This the 5th or 6th (I've lost count) Obama Administration appointee to get his ass-slapped for floating another hare-brained idea. Seem's these guys just don't know what Bambi's plans are.

Then again, neither do we.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/10/veterans.health.insurance/index.html

POT MEET KETTLE

2009-03-09T07:03:00.000-07:00

As any thinking person knows, Democrats railed unmercifully for GWB to fail on every front of his Presidency from day one, as evidenced by the poll above. During the Bush administration, calling for failure was "patriotic dissent" which according to Hillary, Nancy, Harry etal, is er was what "patriotic Americans" should engage in.

If you disagree with this President, and hope his agenda fails, your are now "unpatriotic". Funny how Democrats can justify that, isn't it??

I THOUGHT DEMS WERE AGAINST THIS? OH WAIT, IT'S OBAMANATION!!

2009-02-23T17:41:00.000-08:00

Obama defends Bush-era secrets
(hey, it's ok now, Barry said so)

President Obama’s administration is moving aggressively to protect what the government insists are “state secrets” from a Bush-era wiretapping program. Justice Department lawyers filed an emergency motion Friday with a federal appeals court in an effort to block a lower court’s order that the government must show lawyers for the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation a copy of a document indicating that the group’s communications were being intercepted. The document has been the subject of a running legal battle since the papers were accidentally sent to attorneys for the group in 2004 and subsequently retrieved. “Disclosure of the material at issue here would cause exceptionally grave harm to the national security and result in irreparable injury to the United States,” the Justice Department wrote. It said information about the surveillance program is considered “Top Secret — Sensitive Compartmented Information.” The government wants the wiretapping lawsuit thrown out on the basis of the state secrets privilege, but a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that the privilege is overruled by a law Congress wrote, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Attorney General Eric Holder promised during the confirmation process to conduct a review of the Bush administration’s frequent use of the state secrets privilege. However, the emergency appeal in the al-Haramain case signals that Holder concluded the controversial privilege was correctly asserted there. Earlier this month, civil libertarians were disappointed when the Justice Department stood by the “state secrets” tactic in opposing a suit brought by men who claim they were abducted by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Courtesy of http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19114.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19114.html

SCARED YET? YOU SHOULD BE!!

2009-02-22T12:46:00.000-08:00

http://www.foxbusiness.com/video-search/m/21910345/non-profit-pickets-for-foreclosure-victims.htm#q=OR+ACORN+OR+%22Association+of+Community+Organizations+for+Reform+Now%22

Absolutely astounding. Our tax dollars originally funded ACORN to literally EXTORT banks into giving poor people, with poor credit histories, low cost (to them) loans to buy homes they couldn't afford. Sweet.

Now that the circle is complete, and the homes that everyone knew would go sideways, do in fact go sideways, who is the champion of the non-foreclosure cause? Why, it's your taxpayer funded friends again at ACORN leading the charge to let these people stay in their homes that they couldn't afford to begin with, much less afford them now.Welcome to 2009 and The New New Deal. You are no longer responsible for a fucking thing.The Federal Government and it's Leaders have said so, therefore, it is so.

I'll be honest, I couldn't make it through the entire interview. I would never have believed such a person or such an organization could garner so much support in a country like this.

We are sooooo farked.

WILL THE LEFT CALL BARRY A WAR CRIMINAL NOW??

2009-02-21T07:56:00.000-08:00

The justice department ruled that some 600 so-called enemy combatants at Bagram have no constitutional rights.Most have been arrested in Afghanistan on suspicion of waging a terrorist war against the US.The move has disappointed human rights lawyers who had hoped the Obama administration would take a different line to that of George W Bush.

Now that The Obama Justice Department has decided to retain and enforce THE EXACT SAME POLICY AS THE BUSH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, it would seem reasonable that those calling for War Crimes Charges against GWB for doing this, should be just as incensed at Obama, right??
Let me put this in terms even liberals can comprehend: Barack Obama is holding detainees without benefit of counsel just like George Bush.

That makes Obama a war criminal too, just like Bush, right???

The US military considers Bagram detainees unlawful combatants who can be detained for as long as they are deemed a threat to Afghan national security.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7903005.stm

WILL GM & CHRYSLER FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY?

2009-02-19T09:59:00.000-08:00

My guess is they won’t have to file for bankruptcy. Odds are much better they’ll continue to receive gobs of dough from congress which in turn will be mandating what cars they build, where they build them, and who builds them (UAW, duh).
This a democrat congress dream come true, they have the big three (at least Chrysler & GM) by the balls and they will not squander the opportunity to get the cars built THEY know are best for us, and you can bet your ass they’ll still be built by UAW workers, and they will NOT be making any concessions, as they won’t need to, we’ll be subsidizing their wages just a little more directly is all.
What we’ll end up with is a “nationalized” or “subsidized” auto company with subsidized well paid UAW members making little teeny Pelosimobiles. So if you want to buy what you actually like or need in the near future, you’ll need to look to Toyota, BMW, Hyundai, etc. for a good product. (kinda reminds me of the 70’s)
When you need a new car, you’ll get a goverment owned (and taxpayer subsidized) bank loan, on a government manufactured car, and odds are good you’ll insure it with a government owned insurance policy (AIG or similar). While you’re there at the dealership, chances are the F&I guy will be able to access your health records electronically as well.
It’s a damn shame, GM is finally building a real quality product, world class in fact, in my opinion, and the US Congress is gonna turn it back into turd motors. Swell.
Now, that’s not exactly change you can believe in, but it IS change you better get used to.

ADVICE IF YOU OWE TAXES THIS YEAR

2009-02-01T10:22:00.000-08:00

When April 15 rolls around this year, should you owe the IRS any taxes, instead of sending a check, simply opt for what I like to call "But I'm A Democrat" defense. Relax and take a year or two or 6 and pay it later.

I'm not kidding. EVERYBODY should do this.

After all, if these three high ranking Democrats are allowed to put off their obligations to the IRS until they got caught, why in the hell can't the rest of us?

UPDATE: Via Jake Tapper at ABC News: The informal battle between members of the Obama Administration and the Taxman resulted in a casualty Tuesday, with news that President Obama's nominee to be chief performance officer, Nancy Killefer, will withdraw her nomination following the revelation that she had a $946.69 lien on her property in 2005 for failure to pay taxes.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/another-tax-pro.html

Taxes are for the "little people" and of course, Republicans.